5 Reasons to Question “Peak Oil” Theory

“Peak Oil” is the theory that the world is running out of “fossil fuels” whose depletion will turn society on its head. However, there still exist dual theories on the origin of oil, neither of which can yet be fully proven. It is of great importance to weigh both theories and their implications. Special interests, hidden agendas and policy are at stake which could have dire consequences for governments, private interests and individuals if decisions are made based on faulty intelligence.

There also exists the third argument that it is irrelevant whether oil is a “fossil fuel” or “abiotic”, we simply are pumping much faster than the oil wells can renew themselves. This argument tends to be made by “fossil fuel” theorists and those heavily invested in the environmental movement.

“Peak Oil” theory suggests that the world has reached its zenith in terms of extraction and level of oil consumption.

#1 Dmitri Mendeleev Didn’t Buy It

Famous Russian scientist and creator of the periodic table, Dmitri Mendeleev, didn’t buy it. He believed oil to be abiogenic, formed by “non-biological processes deep in the Earth crust and mantle.” [Source]

Co-founder of the 1869 Russian Chemical Society, Mendeleev was described as “a chemist of genius, first-class physicist, a fruitful researcher in the fields of hydrodynamics, meteorology, geology, certain branches of chemical technology (explosives, petroleum, and fuels, for example) and other disciplines adjacent to chemistry and physics, a thorough expert of chemical industry and industry in general, and an original thinker in the field of economy.” [Source]

Furthermore, there is evidence to suggest that oil renews itself somewhere deep in the Earth’s crust.

“It is safe to assume that most elemental gasses rise in to pockets where heat and pressure would allow forming of larger molecules, including hydrocarbons.

Acknowledging this fact is a double dilemma for the ‘environmentalists’ because hydrocarbons then become ‘renewable’ and using petroleum becomes environmentally friendly.

Russian chemist, Dmitri Mendeleev, in the late 19th century proposed that petroleum products could be formed by chemical processes, independent of buried organic biomass. This theory was further expanded by Russian scientists in the 1950’s with their abiogenic theory of natural petroleum production. At the same time that Dr. M. King Hubbert was fashioning his Malthus based “Peak Oil Theory”, claiming pending end of a finite resource.

The Hydrocarbon, Oxygen and Carbon atoms necessary for Earth’s natural Hydrocarbon production are from ‘elemental’ fission production. We are left to guess at what the Earth’s average Hydrocarbon production rate actually is, but it is certain that OIL is a renewable resource. Completely depleted oil fields in the United States have refilled to as much as 1/3 of original capacity.

While Earths Hydrocarbon production does not appear finite in the near term, there is one thing that is FINITE. The Earth only has a finite storage capacity for this daily petroleum production. This is a double blow to the eco-wackos.” [Joe Olson, Slaying the Sky Dragon 2]

Additional Source: [Abiotic Deep Origins of Hydrocarbons: Myth or Reality?]

#2 The Totalitarian Technocracy Pushes the Idea of “Fossil Fuels” & “Peak Oil”

August Review think tank founder Patrick Wood has given a much-needed update on the status of humanity’s push toward technocracy. “Peak Oil” theorist Hubbert was a key player in this movement. [Source]

“Holding politicians and economists responsible for the debacle of the Great Depression, Technocracy promoted the idea that democracy was a sham and that scientists and engineers should take over the reins of government and impose rationality on the economy.

Technocracy envisioned a no-growth society and the elimination of the price system, to be replaced by the wise administration of the Technocrats. Hubbert believed that a ‘pecuniary’ system, guided by the ‘hieroglyphics’ of economists, was the road to ruin.” [Source]

That a totalitarian technocracy pushes “Peak Oil” theory and wants to reposition humanity under serfdom in their neo-feudal system is not something simply to be brushed aside.

#3 Failed Predictions

“As for their physical availability, the recurring and pessimistic ‘Peak Oil’ reports must be taken with the due grain of salt.  The recent discoveries of ultra-deep oil deposits off the Brazilian coast, in the Gulf of Mexico and other places, besides the promising development of the technologies for exploring the vast and widespread reserves of shale gas, suggest that the alleged limits to the hydrocarbon production expansion are not yet at sight.

By the same token, the possibility of exploring ultra-deep abiotic hydrocarbons must be considered. Although it is contested by the Western mainstream geosciences thinking, the inorganic formation of hydrocarbons is admitted by Russian and Ukrainian scientists since the mid-20th century and certain non-sedimentary oil deposits have been successfully explored in those countries for decades. Such promising possibilities were reinforced by experimental evidences of hydrocarbon formation in the Earth’s upper mantle, in recent experiments performed in the US and Sweden.” [Geraldo Luis Lino, Slaying the Sky Dragon 2]

#4 Club of Rome, Depopulation & Faux “Global Warming” Theory

The Club of Rome, responsible for carving the world up into ten regional blocs, seeks to deindustrialize the planet and bring it under their technocratic control based on myths such as overpopulation, CO2 as a pollutant and the discredited theory of man-made global warming.

They put models out depicting limits to growth instilling fear of total societal collapse. They even cited the 1970’s oil shocks as proof of their theory. However, as mentioned below, the oil shocks were a result of deliberate manipulation and no natural occurrence.

They perpetuate the myth of CO2 as a pollutant and voraciously seek to strip humanity of any resource use, having gone so far as to hatefully label humanity as the common enemy upon which we can all unite. They readily admit that their ideas of pollution and global warming were concocted for these purposes! [Source]

The essence of the “Global Warming” theory not unlike its augmenting “Peak Oil” hypothesis is deindustrialization and depopulation.

This is why Ugandans and Hondurans are currently being massacred by United Nations and European Union contracted mercenaries as a CO2 sacrifice to the Mother Earth goddess Gaia.

The problem is not overpopulation but the distribution of resources and these same powerful interests are at fault for deliberately preventing this from happening due to their hatred of humanity. Tonnes of food are thrown away daily in developed countries while the Third World dies of starvation.

The Council on Foreign Relations also provided an updated report in addition to the Club of Rome’s called The Global 2000 Report to the President. They state that “basic natural resources–farmlands, fisheries, forests, minerals, energy, air, and water–must be conserved and better managed.” Of course, the technocracy will be the ones to manage our land for us in their neo-feudal society.

[Available in full here]

#5 A Mode of Societal Control

In 1967 a dozen high-level government officials reportedly met in underground “contingency of government” (COG) mountain bunkers to discuss the ultimate means of social control and world order. This came to be published incidentally as the Report from Iron Mountain and eventually corroborated by collaborator John Galbraith (subsequently refuted by the same).

The report suggested numerous methods of social control. Of course, it was in tune with the 1909 Carnegie Endowment meeting minutes uncovered by Norman Dodd and the Reece Commission, in their investigation of the tax-exempt foundations. In those old minutes, Carnegie suggested war was the ultimate mode of social control and later begged the question on how they could start a war.

The Iron Mountain report suggested the fabrication of alternate enemies such as terrorists to control society (from the Red Scare to the omnipresent Al-Qaeda to now the “Haqqani Network”).

It then went on to suggest fabricating fear via a global environmental threat, with the possibility of selectively increasing the rate of pollution themselves if their lie wasn’t plausible enough. Think geo-engineering and the BP Gulf oil spill.

The report even suggested staging a fake alien invasion to unite humanity. Of course, our present leaders are playing along with this script, from Nobel economist Paul Krugman to the United Nations and Vatican preparations for “alien contact.”

It is interesting to note that a discovery of aliens would again solely target Christianity and no other faith. [Source]

Prominent ufologists such as Jacques Vallee and J. Allen Hynek suggest that UFO’s are extra-dimensional and not extra-terrestrial phenomena.

Pretext for Deindustrialization

The evidence suggests the elites may yet be pulling another one on us. “Peak Oil” clamor largely emanates from the malicious technocracy and discredited “Global Warming” crowds.

Exxon heads themselves have stated the oil barrel price range should be between $60 and $70 based on supply and demand fundamentals sans price manipulation.

This artificial manipulation is stimulated by powerful private interests such as one occurrence in 1973, where such a group (Bilderberg) met and deliberately raised oil prices 400%. It was a fake crisis, but continues to be cited by “Peak Oil” theorists. [Source]

A Saudi Sheikh stated “: ‘I am 100 per cent sure that the Americans were behind the increase in the price of oil. The oil companies were in real trouble at that time, they had borrowed a lot of money and they needed a high oil price to save them.’

He says he was convinced of this by the attitude of the Shah of Iran, who in one crucial day in 1974 moved from the Saudi view, that a hike would be dangerous to Opec because it would alienate the US, to advocating higher prices.

‘King Faisal sent me to the Shah of Iran, who said: ‘Why are you against the increase in the price of oil? That is what they want? Ask Henry Kissinger – he is the one who wants a higher price’.’

Yamani contends that proof of his long-held belief has recently emerged in the minutes of a secret meeting on a Swedish island, where UK and US officials determined to orchestrate a 400 per cent increase in the oil price.” [Source]

The actual report may be accessed here. It also talks of creating an “international federal reserve.”

Additional Source: [Confessions of an “ex” Peak Oil Believer]


What if “Peak Oil” need not be a problem? Why fret and clamor for inadequate energy sources such as solar and wind energy? If oil is renewable, why not explore the Russian-Ukrainian theory and attempt to determine the rate of renewability and extract this resource appropriately?

What about all of the other suppressed technologies? Prohibition was largely a ploy by the ruling oil barons and bankers to eliminate alternate sources of fuel, such as alcohol and other various fuel sources. Why can’t we go back to producing engines which make use of these alternate fuels such as alcohol and deal with the current problems surrounding the production of ethanol (which is extremely inefficient)?

Rudolf Diesel’s engine also ran on peanut and vegetable oil. As his patents were being taken away from him as done to Nikola Tesla, Diesel was found floating in the sea. [Source]

Collapse may be coming for a variety of reasons, not necessarily because of oil. It may be inevitable given the historic scale of the Ponzi scheme that is called the global economy.

I personally do not even own a car. For those that do, it would be wise to utilize the variety of alternatives that are out there and not be dependent on the technocracy. Water, air, alcohol and vegetable oil fuel cars are already in existence. However, numerous proponents of such independent fuel sources are blackmailed or murdered.

While certain admirable researchers, economists and analysts seem to get one-side of the equation they still cling to the muddy waters of the “Peak Oil” theory, bathed in the eco-fascism of the environmental and technocracy movements.

A recent interview with a person in a position of public influence attests to this. In his body of work, musician Michael Franti notes well the corruption of certain elites through his travels to Iraq and beyond, yet buys into the discredited eco-fascist movement. Incredibly, he even wrote Obama a song. Others such as Dmitry Orlov and Mike Ruppert offer sound and very valuable analysis on a variety of subjects yet promote the “Peak Oil” theory.

I hope the likes question the origins of “Peak Oil” theory and the enviro-fascism that comes with it; the power of having such individuals positioned against the technocracy would make a great difference in the further struggle against totalitarianism.

Also posted to Global Governance Archive.

51 comments to 5 Reasons to Question “Peak Oil” Theory

  • Gareth

    I read about the Russian theory regarding oil about a year ago, but this article explains it in a far better context. Thanks.

    • Brian

      While I love this website I just can’t understand picking and choosing the facts that always support your theories. The fact is you did not even mention ENERGY RETURN ON ENERGY INVESTED. Once you understand EROEI you know that people can complain all they want, Dr. Hubbert was correct when he predicted the U.S. peak oil and EROEI is proving that we are hitting peak oil right now.

  • twisted titan

    excellent article

    I never knew that DIESEL was murdered but given what his engine could do made perfect sense

  • Prudentis

    Please, please, please!

    Not this again.
    “Question everything” is fine and good and all but do we really have to argue about this again?
    If there is still so much oil left then let’s get it … Go and find this ominous abiotic oils and get rich, I say.
    A conspiracy to hide it from us? Gosh, you clearly don’t understand how markets work, do you?
    Oil peaked, as predicted, in about 2005. We are in decline and the EIA, amongs others, bases their slightly growing predictions on yet to be found oil …
    WHICH ISN’T THERE. New findings are in a rapid decline !
    Of course oil renews itself
    The process takes a few million years … wanna wait?
    Why do you pollute your brains with such garbage?
    No peak oil?
    No greenhouse effect?
    No unsustainable population growth?

    All of that conspiracies just to f**k us all?
    How about a different twist? What if all those problems are real and you are being deliberatly lulled into believing them false so you can’t distinguish between real conspiracies and conspiracy hoaxes?

    Sometimes there is a pattern and sometimes noise is just noise!

  • Paul

    Very good article!
    Hydrocarbons and water are the most abundant compounds in the universe. Hydrogen is the most abundant element and carbon the fourth most. Carbon forms more compounds by far than any other element.
    The Powers-That-Be are cooking up a new religion masquerading as science.

  • Ragnar

    I see the infiltrators are working tirelessly to discredit once again, must have hit a nerve there Number 6. It is a rather important facade that they continue. If the veil is dropped and the naked emperor revealed, it’s game over. Problem is, too many folks aren’t just asleep, a coma more aptly depicts their state of mind. They will move beyond verbal and written if necessary to physically assault you in order to achieve your silence. Your truth has the strident ring of nails on a chalkboard for them.

  • Although folks like this guy (http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1318263505.php) offer very interesting information on peak silver as related to peak oil, something still really bugs me about “peak oil.” Sure, conventionally, if or when oil production declines for whatever reason, we’ll be in trouble.

    However, its based on their totalitarian designs, and, if all of the alternative technology were to be unsuppressed, peak oil wouldn’t be an issue!

    The real drive here should not be having to adjust like serfs to the post-peak oil neo-feudal world rather the accurate assessment (in the West) of and production via the Russian-Ukrainian theory coupled with the use of the alternate fuel engines and voila, peak oil is solved.

    Actually, if you read texts by scientists such as the Sky Dragon Slayers team, they debunk the Greenhouse Gas “theory”. It too makes much more sense than the blindfold our current overlords have wrapped around our eyes. Why is it still called “theory”?

    Unsustainable population growth? Like I linked in the article, how is it unsustainable (which calls for a mass culling) when in developed countries you literally throw away tonnes of food and in developing countries people starve. 1 + 1 = redistribute the food into those hungry mouths! End this “free trade” madness and the insane globalist-WTO-corporate laws that allow this!

  • Ben

    @ Number Six. I would agree wholeheartedly.

    I want to make note of a comment you made. It’s not meant to poke at your arguement, merely to point something out. I keep seeing this on other websites about population reduction. I was at SHTF Plan and some folks were talking about how the “Elites” want to reduce the population to 500 million. Some people were very concerened about it.

    I just have one question.

    How do the “Elites” plan to carry out this project? How do they plan on taking out 6 billion people? Starvation? Not quick enough. Pandemic? Still not quick enough and I still don’t believe that the science is there to control a Pandemic. I could be wrong, but I am not sure our science can handle nature’s mutations. Gasing? Still not quick enough. The elites could not even take out 10 million people in WWII and they were doing it round’ the clock for 4+ years. A little over 6 million was the final tally.

    So how are the “Elites” going to manage this effort? I always wonder about the SHEER logistics of taking out 6 billion people.

    Has anyone ever thought about this notion? Done the math? At what point do you realize the task of this “Elite threat”? Who is going to do the disposal? Who is going to carry it out? Can you imagine the sheer numbers of deaths and disease. How do you get rid of 6 billion people in a neat and orderly fashion? What does that even look like? You would have to build factories and blast furnaces just to take this task on. You sure are not going to bury they. If we are viewed as useless eaters, why take up the real estate. Don’t the “Elite” want to turn the earth back to it’s pristine form? Here is another idea. How can the rest of the world deal with such a massive effort? And do these same people who worry about population reduction think that the rest of us are going to just go along with getting rid of the other 6 bill? How do you convince us?

    Think about that one for a minute and give me an answer. I have asked it on a ton of other sites and have been called a shill or a liberal or a troll or whatever.

    I guess you can think critcally…but not too critically. At least not enough to go against the “Elites” plans or Agenda 21 or whatever their NWO template is at the moment.

    Perhaps they don’t have as much power as we think?

    There’s an idea…

  • I agree it isn’t an easy thing, and I’m not saying that there is any guarantee of it happening!

    However, I only gather this information from their own documents, you can go on and on from the Club of Rome to Kissinger’s NSSM 200 to the Georgia Guidestones to all the elites who have publicly called for depopulation to the UN Biodiversity assessments and so on.

    It could also be a lot simpler than one thinks. Remember, you have to have long-term vision, a long view of history. They work incrementally with patience. Perhaps it is as simple as gradual sterilization over a generation? That’s what the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is focusing on, for example. Maybe they have a wildcard. Maybe Occupy Wall Street/Fed will stop it! Enjoy the show!

  • Prudentis

    Lol Ragnar, “infiltrators” really? Have you read any of my other comments.
    Nice strategy. When I do not agree, the other one must surely be an “agent” of “the other side”. You are ridiculous.

    Now to you Nr. 6
    “if all of the alternative technology were to be unsuppressed, peak oil wouldn’t be an issue!”
    Here I agree wholeheartedly. And this is exactly why I am so pissed, when someone tries willingly or unwittingly taking the discussion in wrong directions.
    Peak oil is a very easily proven fact and I have spent many, many hours researching it. But is that the real issue? No. Freeing markets from regulation is the real issue. Subsidisation is the problem.
    Free markets adjust to shortages in the fastest and most efficient way. Trying to regulate in one or the other directon destroys many opportunities for real and timelyalternatives.
    As to global warming. It is a fact. There are scientists disagreeing as for the causes being other than co2. Read the REAL papers not some youtube hocus pocus and you will see, their claims are being looked into very seriously.
    Stop hopping around like children screaming Conspiracy everywhere. RESEARCH!

  • Prudentis

    The population debate is a very difficult one, since it mixes scientific and moral aspects.
    From a moral perspective, it seems ridiculous to even consider “regulating” the growth of human population.
    From a scientifc, demographic point of view, there just aren’t any better alternatives because either we do it volunterily or earth does it involuntarily for us. You can scream and wish all you want. There simply is a physical limit to the number of humans on the planet. We might not have exceeded the number yet but would you really like to live on a planet, that has so many people, even if they are all fed, that the most space anyone can occupy is 100m2 ?
    You can forget your individual property rights the moment, where there is so little place left, that every house built takes away a place, anyone else could have had. We are not there yet but if you keep closing your eyes to the possibility of this future problem, you are not better than a virus or paraiste which spreads and in the end kills not only the host but itself in the process.
    I know it sounds radical but I am not proposing forceful steralization, birth control or any thing like that. I propose education for all to be abel to mathematically grasp the problem and understand the might of logarythimc growth.
    I couldnt put it better than Dr. Bartlett: “… the lesson is, that zero population growth is gonna happen”
    The question is, do we use education to increase the problem by promoting the idiotic notion, that population growth can go on forever or do we use education to reduce ignorance to the problem?

  • Ragnar


    I mentioned no names, guilty conscientious? I guess if the shoe fits right? Anyway, I whole heartedly support your right to be led astray by the Peak Oil/Global Warming harpies or whoever else provides the recent research documentation you’ve reveiwed.

  • You see, for this reason I lumped “Peak Oil” theorists together with the “Climate Alarmists.”

    Man-made global warming is a proven fraud, officially discredited. I have read the real research, purchased real forecasts by scientists such as Piers Corbyn, I even have contact with real scientists including “climate” scientists. I have even had the displeasure of bathing in the presence of Heir Gore.

    I don’t want to get in a discussion on warming, because basic research will tell you the truth. CO2 is a basic building block of life, not a cancer. More is actually good. Its presence is actually infinitesimal. The Medieval Warm Period proves yet again that the sun is behind warming. Statistics show we may actually be in a global cooling trend. CO2 actually lags BEHIND temperature warmth by hundreds of years, explain that one! Every single time the “global warming” crowd has been caught lying. And on and on…as the cherry on top you can put all those elitist documents which tell us how they will use it as an external threat to unite us for world government.

  • Prudentis

    All your claims are based on assumptions frmo this film:

    I suggest you watch this one instead:

    Then go and research the primary sources and try to prove/disprove. It is a very tedious and long scientific process, which almost NO internet writer spewing about Global warming being FACT or HOAX has ever done. (me included on most of the research) because there just isn’t enough time to be an expert.
    I don’t care on which side of the debate you think you are. If you are basing your arguement upon the views of others’ then at least research as far as to be able to distinguish between scientific arguement and oppinion.

    Ragnar: I do not feel guilty. Guilt does not come from trying to educate the ignorant. I just hope you are not beyond reason. I have yet to read a single POINT other than namecalling and attacks from you.

    You guys are too dogmatic on those issues. This is not a question on believes and disbelievs or oppinions. It is a question of ideas and skepticizm to those.
    Facts are proven ideas until they are disproven.

  • Prudentis

    “It is the nature of the humen species to reject what is true but unpleasant and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting” – H.L. Mencken

    So in light of this quote … are you 100% sure, that you are not living under the ignorant illusion just because it is so much easier to believe everything is a huge conspiracy than to face the real problems?

  • Vince

    I agree with the article, however, the “Peak Oil” arguement has more backing when the premise is “peak oil is the limited amount of cheaply extracted oil”. So, there is plenty of carbon based sources, however, it will be more costly to get it, thereby causing it to be economically unavailable. That’s how I understood the “Peak Oil” problem to be correctly understood. Again, not argueing with the statements, but there is more too it than just a notion of running out of the natural resource.

  • Ragnar

    Pru, if you’ve truly discovered that my posts deliver only name-calling and attacks, this alone speaks volumes about the inadequacy of your research.

    To those of you who have become as bored as I with the banter between Pru and myself, my apologies, I’ll try not to encourage these vociferous mewlings in the future.

  • Prudentis

    OK Rag let’s stay civil. I’m not easily offended, I only complained, because you did not provide any valid points to the discussion only negated mine without giving any concrete numbers, facts or anything just stating your sentance about “infiltrators” like anyone disagreeing had to automatically be against you.

    Vince, that is not entirely correct.
    Peak oil is the point in time, where daily production is at it’s absolute, all-time top, meaning, that after that point of time, no matter how hard you try, you won’t be able to exceed this peak amount.

    That means, that additional discoveries and throwing money at holes in the ground can indeed postpone this event, which it in fact did. Unfortunately, peak oil is nevertheless allready behind us at 87.2 Mb/d in the first quarter of 2008. See the 2011 IEA report for accurate numbers. (http://omrpublic.iea.org/omrarchive/sup2010.pdf)
    Another interesting fact: currently producing crude oil fields plateaoed from 2005-2008 and are in decline since 2008.
    Now there is still about half the oil left in the ground but:
    1. we can’t continue to grow the economy based on oil anymore
    2. the current population, agriculture and economy become unsustainable
    and most important
    3. There is a point on the right side of the curve, where the EI/ER (energy invested on energy returned) ratio comes to 1:1 and this is the de facto point, where pulling oil out of the ground is only logical, if you don’t use it for energy but for it’s utility because it would otherwise be a waste of oil to drill it. After this point, there just isn’t any oil left for us to drill for energy use.
    There is in fact the possibility to drill oil after that with cheaper, alternative energy. But this is amoot point, since it doesn’t mean anything for “energy”-oil only for “utility”-oil and I am only willing to discuss it with people, who accept and understand the more basic concepts.

    Let me conclude this post with a quote by Aldous Huxley:

    “Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored”

  • Prudentis

    As for global warming and overpopulation … let me just say, that I give up without giving in.
    I still think you are ignoring the facts but since peak oil and the impending economic collapse will render those two concepts irrelevant (declining economy will bring less pollution and forced depopulation) I don’t want to waste energy (no pun intended :) ) and time to argue about them.

    Ah and keep stacking silver! (I sure am)

  • Prudentis

    Alow me one more quote :)

    “Unlike plagues of the dark ages or contemporary diseases we do not yet understand, the modern plague of overpopulation is soluble by means we have discovered and with resources we possess. What is lacking is not sufficient knowledge of the solution but universal consciousness of the gravity of the problem and education of the billions who are its victims.”

    Martin Luther King, Jr., acceptance speech, Margaret Sanger award in human rights 1966; Lamont Hempil Sustainable communities.

  • Ragnar


    Civility is welcome and you are correct, I did nothing to try and convince you otherwise. My intent was not to point out that you were against me either. Clearly we view these topics from different research venues. You are certainly as well aware as I am that finding a rabbit hole on the net to parallel ones own views is less than difficult these days. Perhaps all of us have been guilty of this at one time or another. I also agree with the give up rather than give in strategy you demonstrated lastly. As you stated, it is in fact of no real importance whether I agree with you regarding global warming or over-population. Neither will be relevant when the economy collapses worldwide.

  • And so the technocracy continues:

    Green taxes could force 1 in 4 into fuel poverty


    Interesting article. There is no mention about how many things are made of oil. If there was peak oil wouldn’t we go back to using glass bottles and containers for our liquids and food. Everything is made of oil!!!!! Look around you!!!! You are probably sitting at your computer drinking a soda out of a plastic bottle made from Oil. You may get cold so put on your fleece jacket…made from OIL! Get in your car and drive down and rent a movie tonight. Your car is mainly made of plastic from OIL!!! Or put your DVD (made of plastic from oil)in your DVD player made of plastic and watch it on your plastic TV!!! Wake up people. Look around you! Everything in our lives is made from some oil based product!!! If there was truly peak oil don’t you think we would be making products from something other than oil? Oil is the MOST profitable business in the world! Use your brains and critical thinking capacity before arguing about something so stupid! We have all been duped by the NWO which does control everything. Sorry to tell you that!!!

  • Toxicosis

    @ Fight the NWO– Obviously this is a modern day illusion or delusion people in advanced civilizations such as are own either don’t get or conveniently deny. Virtually everything we consume in our lives has somehow or someway been impacted by the use of oil and/or natural gas. People who “disbelieve” in the peaking “phenomenon” need to recognize, however, that unless a carbon based substitute in massive amounts is discovered to replace what we as a world are dependent on, our way of life will fail. Before the discovery of oil and it’s capacity for multiple uses we literally lived in a candle/fire stone age society. I could care less about the NWO’s plans. They also depend on oil and eventually when war and revolution breaks out not even they will be immune to the effects of carbon insufficiency. And to all those who think peak oil is a conspiracy sham, show us your numbers on abiotic oil, and what’s left of crude oil, and how easy it will be to continually produce close or above 87 million barrels a day. It isn’t happening so prepare accordingly. Personally I don’t care what most people do, since most don’t think for themselves or do any personal research anyway. I am more than willing to help those who help themselves and commit to due diligence and intensive research because the need for survival is coming far more than most could possibly imagine.

  • You abiogenic oil people are DELUSIONAL.

    You probably believe in cold fusion and “free energy” from the quantum vacuum too!

    We won’t have too long to see what fools you are.

  • Patforlife

    Global Warming is REAL , Solar System Warming is REAL , MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX even DEBUNKED by NASA , The Man Made Global Warming HOAX is an excuse for the Elites to try and collect Carbon Taxes and control society, this is going on under our noses and you have to be a complete idiot to deny this fact, so PRUDENTIS you have not done your homework. Co2 is not evil , the oceans emit more C02 into the atmosphere than man cab produce , the Icelandic volcano eruptions in just 1 eruption put 10 years worth of so called man made Co2 emissions into the atmosphere and PRUDENTIS what do plants breath??? Co2!!!!! Man Made Global Warming is psuedo-science at best. WAKE UP!

    Man Made Global Warming is a HOAX and Psuedo-Science , Global Warming ( due to the Sun changes IS REALITY) we have ZERO control over it, stop talking as if this is undisputed fact it hotly disputed!!!! Man Made Global Warming is the conspiracy to control and tax in the name of fake science, DO NOT DRINK THE KOOLAID! Research!!






  • Putin

    Do we really need to argue about this. America produces half the oil it did in 1970…so if oil is really abiotic….then why do we produce half what we used to? This includes gulf of mexico oil which we didn’t produce in 1970. Assuming we are producing it faster than it reproduces…then we still have a peak oil problem, just not as as serious as the one I think we have. We can’t get past facts.

  • Sam

    No shortage of oil is correct. There are 4 trillion barrels of oil that the U.S. is getting ready to produce. They will take down the Middle East, with the goal of Saudi
    Arabia being the last country to fall. These Arab uprisings are all planned by the MI-6 and CIA: Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Jordan will be taken down. As a matter of fact, MI-6 created the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928. The target for oil is $150 to $200 per barrel before the 4 trillion in reserves will be activated: 2 trillion barrels 1,000 feet below the Rocky Mountains, 650 billion barrels from the Bakken Oil Formation (North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana), and another 1.5 trillion from Gull Island, Alaska. Another fact is the Liberty Rig (world’s largest oil drilling rig) has already been built in Alaska. The Liberty Rig will drill out 2 miles and down 5 miles. Abiotic oil is a fact, it came with the planet and not from a bunch of crushed up plants and dinosaurs.

    • jimbo

      4 trillion barrels of conventional oil, where is it? If you are talking about shale forget it. It takes more energy to seperate shale oil from the oil shale than what it produces. What good is that?

    • jimbo

      I almost forgot. Don’t confuse pockets of conventional oil that is trapped between the shale oil layers with shale oil. This is not the “monster” shale oil that MSM is talking about. These conventional oil pockets are being produced but the reserves are nothing compared to the old used up oil that was here in the USA years ago. Don’t run with the headlines, do some detailed research.

    • jimbo

      Gull island does not have 1.5 trillion barrels of oil. “According to Alaska’s Division of Oil and Gas 2007 annual report, Point McIntyre had a cumulative production of 395.6 million barrels of oil at the end of 2006, with 164 million barrels of remaining reserves. The other three pools are much smaller than Point McIntyre.” http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/690171677.shtml

  • A new-age channeler of Rum Tum Tugger told me that the
    Pleiadians wanted to deliver a “free energy” machine
    a few weeks ago which would solve all the world’s energy problems.

    But, just as expected the big oil companies hired MI6
    and 14U to launch a stealth light torpedo that intercepted
    and destroyed the transport ship just before it entered
    our atmosphere.

    Remember the “so called” satellite which fell to earth?
    Well now you know.

  • I say. I say.

    That ain’t funny. Do those plebeians believe in social justice?

  • wisefool


    Yes, actually the conspiracies are indeed designed to eventually f’ us all, and the best part is you won’t have to wait millions of years to find this one out.

    Anyone who’s foundation is built on humanism. Just to warn you, it will crumble. You are about to be dissapointed.

  • Chaos Theory

    The chaos theory is the study of dynamic systems which are highly sensative to initial conditions. For instance, you have some equation were you plug in the number 1 and get a answer X, well the chaos theory shows us that is we plug in 1.0000000000000001 instead of 1, we will get C, which is a completely different answer. This theory is how I like to describe scientific information used to describe the global warming theory. One little bit of missing information can either prove or disprove the global warming theory or distort the answer so much it’s left in limbo, which is why global warming is not fact but theory. The only logical way to say global warming is fact is to have all the information dating from the creation of earth till present and since we don’t have that information how can science say it is fact? Scientists call global warming a fact based off of what, .01% of the total climate information in regards to the age of the earth? You can call that a fact all you want, I’ll call it a red herring.

    I hope ya’ll like how I use theories to prove/disprove theories.

    On a side note, there is evidence of particles faster than the speed of light. They are called neutrinos. There was a recent experiment that showed neutrinos reached the target 69 NS faster than light. If that is true Einstein isn’t as smart as we all thought and disproves basically modern physics as we know it.

    The point I’m trying to get at is that if you want to place faith in something I sure as hell wouldn’t place it in something that can’t be %100 backed by facts, such as global warming. If the planet is roughly 5 billion years old how can we take evidence from the past 500,000 years or even 10 million years and have enough data to know global warming is actually happening? And even if it is happening, how do we know humans are the cause?

    Now look at it from my point of view. If something has not been proven factual, but is being pushed as factual, then logic would dictate some sort of agenda is being pushed upon people. Why tell a lie unless there is something to gain from it?

  • Media Ignoring Important Information about Japan Nuclear Disaster

    Richard (Dick) Cheney, Vice President of the U.S., former Secretary of Defense, former Chairman and CEO of Halliburton, former member of the House of Representatives, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, is guilty of War Crimes.

    Michael Ruppert promoted a man who was the biggest energy investor in the world, Matthew Simmons who was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations until he passed away.

    That is conflict of interest. Michael Ruppert exposes Cheney yet ignores the fact Matthew Simmons was also a member of the same organization.

    Please help my free documentary go viral, its already changed peoples lives. Raise the standards because the elite dumbed so many down. the propaganda movie collapse has been seen by millions, the propaganda zeitgeist movies have been seen by millions. This will change the world. Scientists believe precious metals got here by asteroids and meteorites, in fact some meteorite storms it rains gold, silver, platinum and other metals. What if theres new metals to discover? That might be good superconducting magnets to generate artificial gravity, collect antimatter and store it.

    5 Near Earth Asteroids=100 Trillion $ (USD)

    Antimatter: The Future is Now Full HD Documentary

    Watch Antimatter: The Future is Now Full HD Documentary on Vimeo

    Free Documentary about antimatter, asteroid mining, space settlements/space colonization, space exploration, spacecraft, space travel, hemp, sustainability and self sufficiency. There is so much technology and science that exists, scientists even conclude we could settle space with rockets with present technology. There is a lack of public interest in sustaining civilization. How long did it take scientists to develop nuclear? That sure got a lot of attention and it did not take long. Today’s world is very inefficient, toxic pollution is a big source of sickness and disease. Hemp products are safe, stronger, and last a lifetime. Hemp is the key to sustainability. To say the world is on the wrong track, is an understatement of the highest order.

    Some near earth asteroids contain up to 20 Trillion $ in USD. There are practically an infinite number of asteroids in the universe.

    I suggest researching everything and follow the science verifying the sources.

    Bill Gates spends millions investing into toxic genetically modified corn to grow ethanol, when hemp produces 6-10 times more ethanol per acre in comparison, and is a lot less energy intensive. Hemp with low THC produces less seed compared to moderate strains of THC. Search Do it Yourself ethanol.

    This information will change the world. So many people are at such low levels of knowledge even scientific types could benefit greatly waking up. Help the world not support corrupt greedy psychopaths who wage wars over resources because they outlaw the best resource.

  • Paul Chesterworth

    The oil companies have began pumping from old wells in the USA that have replenished themselves after letting them settle for years. That was the idea behind getting oil from other fields in the gulf and middle east.

    • jimbo

      They don’t produce at the same rate that they originally did, not even close. Some oil will seep back into the well if left alone for a while.

  • David

    In relation to abiotic oil, Some people also think that comet elenin was a spaceship from another world… Bottom line is that peak oil is not a theory, it is an observable mathematical fact, and anyone who has done the high school math on the production in the US lower 48 province will know that the thesis was proved correct years ago. This article is very badly researched.

  • Paul

    Here is still yet another problem for the Peakers:

    Ah, interplanetary dinosaurs!

    • jimbo

      So what Saturn’s moons had an endowment of a huge amount of menthane gas when the solar system was formed. The outer planets such as Saturn and moons are gaseous while the inner ones such as Earth have much more solid material and less much gas. This doesn’t mean that more is continually being produced. The only possible, unlikely, argument non peak oil believers may have is that fossil fuels were not from dinosaurs. The Earth when formed billions of years ago may have had an endowment of oil but this oil is finite and is being used up.

    • jimbo

      Dinosaurs don’t fit into your 10,000 year BS Earth age theory.

  • Josiah

    Hydrocarbons such as oil, natural gas and coal surely are abiotic and primordial materials in origin. Oil is very abundant and peak oil is merely a myth as well as to think that “fossil fuels” could exist. It’s noteworthy that we are in 21th century and not in the Middle Age. It’s also interesting keep in mind what Sir Fred Hoyle said:

    “The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.” — Fred Hoyle, cosmologist/astrophysicist, 1982

  • Monk

    No. 1 is highly questionable.

    No. 2 is the opposite: a “totalitarian technocracy” wants business as usual and insists that there are techno-fixes for all sorts of problems. That is why corporations, not just governments, and their sheeple refer to all this, not to mention climate change, as part of conspiracy theory, as nothing should get in the way of more profits.

    What happened is the complete opposite of No. 3. Hubbert got it right about 1970 for U.S. peak production and 2005 for global peak production. If there’s anything that was not mentioned, it was BP’s revelation that energy production peaked in the late 1970s.

    No. 4 is also the complete opposite. Other countries are being attacked not because they are being “sacrificed” to “Mother Gaia” but because of No. 2: large corporations and their government servants need continuous economic growth, which is why “easy oil” is critical. Now, their propaganda machine has managed to convince the sheeple to think the same way: anyone who questions continuous economic growth or the ability of big business and big government to solve these problems is a conspiracy theorist. In fact, they sometimes play both sides of the field by arguing that there are no problems because business- and government-driven techno-fixes saves all.

    No. 5 is based on COINTELPRO. That is, play both sides of the field. Thus, any corporate promises of saving the day is celebrated and those who question such are booed. Enjoy the dog and pony show, sheeple!

  • Stuardo

    I would suggest to everyone interested in this topic of Peak Oil to please understand the science and mathematics behind the consumption of finite resources before they become passionate about an important issues that requires a full understanding in order to give an informed opinion.
    I came across a video called The Most Important Video You´ll Ever See on Youtube. This is a lecture by Dr. Albert Bartlett of the University of Colorado in which he explains, without the interference of passion, the cold hard facts of the arithmetic behind infinite growth, consumption of resources in a finite world and why the human race´s biggest failure is not understanding the logarithmic function.
    If you really want to become informed about Peak Oil, I ask you to begin by understanding the math and take the time to watch the video that lasts around an hour.
    In the end youll see that the points made in this article, assuming they were true, are simply unimportant and of no consequence when it comes to resource consumption.
    I hope it opens your eyes to the truth of science and reason and not the blindness of passion. Following is the link

  • […] a Comment Join The Exclusive Intel Hub Mailing List! // Tweet Dont-tread-on.me By Number 6 October 12, […]

  • […] Don’t Tread on Me is clearly far too biased to source. It may be good and motivating literature, but it is too subjective to cite for purposes of research. The headline of the page is: “Freak out America! Peak oil is here.” […]

  • […] Site three just immediately looks bad.  The whole page is unbelievably busy with politically skewed links and ads and every other word is a buzz word.  Everything else on the site is political garbage. Even if there was a good article in there somewhere there’s just no way I could trust it.  I don’t even have to read the Peak Oil piece to file this one in the ‘not authoritative’ cabinet. […]

Support our fight with a one time donation.


Over 300+ Videos